Illegal Motion or False Start

[MJT]

That was a lean, and not a step (as there was in the Texas - TTech game) so I'd have illegal motion on this play. The T -TTech play was called the way we have been instructed, as the RB took a step. No arguement by the coaches in last nights game.

TXMike, I would assume you saw the play I am talking about in last nights game. Did you agree with that one?

[JRutledge]

If the player had done something to make it look like they were to go in motion, then I would see this not being called as a FS. But that is not what he did. He clearly missed the snap and that should be called. In this case this is college and you do not want to have defense moving into the neutral zone as a result of an offensive player missing the snap.

Peace

[MJT]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

If the player had done something to make it look like they were to go in motion, then I would see this not being called as a FS. But that is not what he did. He clearly missed the snap and that should be called. In this case this is college and you do not want to have defense moving into the neutral zone as a result of an offensive player missing the snap.

Peace

Rut,
I disagree cuz I don't think he missed the snap count, as he did not start to move (lean) until the receiver had been in motion for over 2 seconds. Now if he started his lean the very instant the receiver went in motion, the "missed the snap" would have more bearing and I could see a FS being the correct call. Watch it again keeping in mind what I am saying and see what you think.

[DesertZebra]

Originally Posted by MJT

so I'd have illegal motion on this play.

Illegal shift

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by DesertZebra

Illegal shift

Could have had IM too (instead), as the motion man was moving forward at the snap.

[MJT]

Originally Posted by DesertZebra

Illegal shift

This would not be an illegal shift because of the definition of a shift. See case play 7.2.7 for a similar explanation of the difference between IM and IS, similar to this play.

[TXMike]

What I was trying to assess was the legality of what the motion man was doing assuming the RB who had lurched forward had done nothing. Make believe that RB had not moved at all and all we had was what the motion man was doing....false start or illegal motion?

[MJT]

Originally Posted by TXMike

What I was trying to assess was the legality of what the motion man was doing assuming the RB who had lurched forward had done nothing. Make believe that RB had not moved at all and all we had was what the motion man was doing....false start or illegal motion?

Well if that is what you are discussing, that is a classic example of IM cuz he is moving towards the LOS at the snap. It would not be a FS in this case. It would be a FS if he was going sideways, or slightly backwards and then turned quickly up field before the snap cuz that quick turn would be simulating the start of the play.

[ljdave]

Live ball foul, since it's not a foul until the snap. If he'd adjusted his motion to a path that was parallel to the LOS before the snap, we'd have nothing (That is, ignoring the obvious false start by the RB).

[DesertZebra]

Originally Posted by MJT

This would not be an illegal shift because of the definition of a shift. See case play 7.2.7 for a similar explanation of the difference between IM and IS, similar to this play.

Not the same thing. This was not a QB in motion.

[MJT]

Originally Posted by DesertZebra

Not the same thing. This was not a QB in motion.

True, but the fact is it does not meet the definition of a shift, so it cannot be an illegal shift.

SECTION 39 SHIFT
A shift is the action of one or more offensive players who, after a huddle or after taking set positions, move to a new set position before the ensuing snap.

The back does not move to a new set position, he just leans, so it cannot be an IS. It is pretty much semantics to say IS or IM anyway cuz they are treated exactly the same way, but they are different rules.